|
|
Post by gameboy on Jun 20, 2021 4:24:12 GMT
I agree. When zoologists chose the term "kingdom" it was more in the sense of "realm" or "domain". I don't think they had patriarchy or a monarchy in mind. Mind you, the ants have their own agenda…  Joan Collins!
But this whole politically correct assault on the term Kingdom in taxonomy poses an interesting question.
When will they be calling for The United Kingdom to change its name? And what will they call it? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Jun 20, 2021 10:50:44 GMT
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with established words and orders being challenged even if it often brings about ridiculous results. The United Kingdom remained being called The United Kingdom even when Elizabeth became monarch, the only real change over was that organisations and roles with the title “His Majesty’s” had to be renamed “Her Majesty’s”. I once mentioned at work that we could save a lot of money if they removed the link to royalty because an awful lot of stationery would have to be ditched every time the royal gender changed.
That said I do think “The Animal Kingdom” reads funny (my natural aversion to pomposity) but none of my personal feelings are hurt. At the risk of being cancelled I have to say that this is how I also feel about the present cack handed and unnecessary reorganisation of gender.
They can wake me us when they have presented the final list of genders to parliament and it’s about to become law.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfromni on Jun 20, 2021 11:56:56 GMT
The "His" and "Her" made no difference to UK official stationery publications. It all came under the heading of "H.M.S.O." (i.e. His (or Her) Majesty's Stationery Office) or HM Stationery Office. At first HMSO was the agent for various government departments but, from 1822, all government departments were required to buy stationery through the open competitions and tenders operated by HMSO. Most of its publishing functions were privatised in 1996 as a separate company known as The Stationery Office (TSO), but HMSO continued as a separate part of the Cabinet Office. Prior to 1996, it was the publisher of virtually all government material, such as command papers, legislation and official histories. After 1996 the Controller of HMSO remained Queen's Printer of Acts of Parliament and retained the role of administering Crown copyright. A new body, the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) was created in 2005 and that still stands today. So whether His and Her stationery, it really didn't, and still doesn't matter. No ditching, except for stuff that is or was embarrassing.  |
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Jun 20, 2021 13:13:39 GMT
The "His" and "Her" made no difference to UK official stationery publications. It all came under the heading of "H.M.S.O." (i.e. His (or Her) Majesty's Stationery Office) or HM Stationery Office. At first HMSO was the agent for various government departments but, from 1822, all government departments were required to buy stationery through the open competitions and tenders operated by HMSO. Most of its publishing functions were privatised in 1996 as a separate company known as The Stationery Office (TSO), but HMSO continued as a separate part of the Cabinet Office. Prior to 1996, it was the publisher of virtually all government material, such as command papers, legislation and official histories. After 1996 the Controller of HMSO remained Queen's Printer of Acts of Parliament and retained the role of administering Crown copyright. A new body, the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) was created in 2005 and that still stands today. So whether His and Her stationery, it really didn't, and still doesn't matter. No ditching, except for stuff that is or was embarrassing. The stationery and identification cards that I used to produce had “Her Majesty’s” on them. Believe it or not but sometimes I say this stuff from personal experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Jun 20, 2021 15:33:51 GMT
Mother Nature has been around since the planet was formed into a place which preserved life. On the same time scale humans are newcomers by a considerable margin. If old Mother says there are only two genders, I tend to believe her, but only humans think they know better than Mother Nature and try to prove her wrong. And yes gameboy is right when saying .., "All of this has a political agenda behind it, mainly the destruction of the male/female dichotomy. It's as if they want to create so much confusion about gender and sex that unisex becomes the only realistic option."...but the agenda goes deeper. It's to do with control and power over minds. But Mother Nature will be proved right. Humans have been circumventing nature for their own purposes longer than any of has been alive, and will continue to do so. There is no "Mother" issuing opinions and proclamations; restricted only by the realm of the physically possible, humans will do what they do. The rest is merely cultural invention. "The male/female dichotomy" could use a little "destruction." Other than a bedroom or maternity ward, there are very few places in which it's either necessary or beneficial. I don't much care how anyone identifies, dresses, what restroom they use or about other such behaviors of little or no consequence to others. This remark is revealing: "It's to do with control and power over minds." Anyone hoping to hold all of humanity to their own standards is destined for frustration, so don't worry so much about what people you don't know are doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfromni on Jun 20, 2021 16:31:25 GMT
Ditto. Otherwise I wouldn't say it. I'm quite sure that your experience is correct, but the vast amount of government stationery was headed simply OHMS . HM Stationery Office, or by the names of the relevant Office (s) in communication.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfromni on Jun 20, 2021 17:04:46 GMT
Oh I quite agree, but only when a single human entity can reproduce itself will I believe in a third human gender. An hermaphrodite must have such a boring life, don't you agree? Cultivate a garden all you wish, but with no one to tend it Mother Nature will quickly reclaim it. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Jun 20, 2021 17:49:06 GMT
Oh I quite agree, but only when a single human entity can reproduce itself will I believe in a third human gender. An hermaphrodite must have such a boring life, don't you agree? Cultivate a garden all you wish, but with no one to tend it Mother Nature will quickly reclaim it. There's that mythical "Mother" again. In the meantime, here are humans doing what they do, as reported yesterday by the Orlando Sentinal: Doesn't bother me a bit; why should it? It's not about counting genders. No difference to me if there are 2, 22 or 200. It's about people exercising the freedom to live as they like without concern for the "control and power over minds" others would exert to suit their own approval.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfromni on Jun 20, 2021 18:00:27 GMT
To Doghouse6 I use "Mother Nature" metaphorically, not mythologically. |
|
